Donald Trump Thread

[lax16]

What I mean is that Trump, more often than not, puts both feet in his mouth while shooting them. I had thought he was becoming a masterful politician; however, hearing him talk about the rigged system in relation to Hillary and the FBI findings and following that by reiterating that the Iraq War was disastrous because Saddam Hussein had been beneficial to us by killing terrorists, reveals that he does not yet know how to capitalize on a moment in time that can be truly harmful to Hillary Clinton’s chances of winning the general election. Why squander the opportunity by shifting to a topic that most Republican conservatives do not appreciate or resent? Trump has a tendency to go one step forward and two steps backward. That is why I think he needs help by choosing a VP nominee who can stick to one topic of importance at a time.

Oh you are so right- and it is so painfully frustrating to watch.

 

[mary_bobo]

It is a stupid thing to say anything positive about Saddam Hussain! It is just one of many stupid things that he has said. Real Republicans know that you cannot say stupid things every day and become President! THat why real Republicans must support the Convention dumping Trump and nominating someone else to defeat Clinton. I can’t help that my friends realize what should be obvious - Trump can’t win!

That’s what they said in the primaries. Real Republicans voted for him in the primaries and for better or worse, he is the nominee. He may lose and we’ll get Hillary, but I continue to think, although I am not happy with Trump, but IMO he is far better than Hillary. The woman is dishonest to the core, demonstrably cannot tell the truth in even small matters and has been surrounded by chaos all of her life in and around government. IMO she is not fit to be president.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Trump, RNC Raise $51 Million in June

Trump’s finance officer said that 400,000 people donated to the
campaign, with 94 percent of them giving under $200. The campaign established a digital fundraising operation late last month meant to cultivate grassroots donations; it brought in $26 million – $6.6 million of which was raised in conjunction with the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, which shares funds with the RNC.

realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/07/06/trump_rnc_raise_51_million_in_june_131116.html

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

So far, two different channels used the word unhinged and a third commentator likened him to Charlie Sheen.

Any thoughts?

Did he use the word “winning”? They both like that word.

 

[estesbob]

Did he use the word “winning”? They both like that word.

Everything I have seen said the speech was hard hitting and well received.

 

[XndrK]

Ha1i I like you X! It’s a movie. You should watch it some time!

 

[Ridgerunner]

I don’t like Hillary either, but she will be President if Trump is the Republican nominee. He is dishonest to the core as well and cannot tell the truth in small matters. He has said stupid things ever since he won. Attacking a judge in a way that seems racist. Saying anything good about Saddam Hussain. He will lose the election because he says stupid things and he says them over and over again!

Trump said about Saddam Hussein the exact same thing liberals have been saying for years, including here on CAF; that he was a bad man but kept the terrorists down. Taken by itself, that’s indisputably true. He added, as the Dem establishment has argued, that Bush shouldn’t have destabilized Iraq by knocking Saddam out. I don’t personally agree with that, but to see liberals raise such a fuss about him saying it now is jaw-dropping.

If you look at what Trump actually said about the judge (whose ethics I would seriously question in the ruling Trump was talking about) was that he’s “Mexican”, which Trump followed with “which is fine”.

But I agree that Trump leaves himself open to attack in what he says. He obviously has not polished parsing phrases for 40 years like the Clintons have. To me, it’s actually refreshing not to have to figure out what “…the meaning of ‘is’ is”.

 

[queenofheartscv]

Many Republicans regret their votes. If Donald Trump had been talking about his admiration of Saddam Hussian in Februray he would not have won. We realize our mistake now and must stop him before he gets the nomination by choosing someone who is better. Hopefully pro-life as well!

What he said about sadam is thre same thing he said since day one: sadam kept the balance of power in the region and it was a mistake to go into Iraq. Nothing different except the media is grasping at straws to bring him down.

You want someone who won’t say things like that? We’ve tried last two times. We had 16 other candidates who had their chance. I do not regret my vote nor do I know anyone who does.

 

[XndrK]

Five Thirty-Eight gives the chance of Trump winning at 22.3%.

 

[meltzerboy]

Trump said about Saddam Hussein the exact same thing liberals have been saying for years, including here on CAF; that he was a bad man but kept the terrorists down. Taken by itself, that’s indisputably true. He added, as the Dem establishment has argued, that Bush shouldn’t have destabilized Iraq by knocking Saddam out. I don’t personally agree with that, but to see liberals raise such a fuss about him saying it now is jaw-dropping.

If you look at what Trump actually said about the judge (whose ethics I would seriously question in the ruling Trump was talking about) was that he’s “Mexican”, which Trump followed with “which is fine”.

But I agree that Trump leaves himself open to attack in what he says. He obviously has not polished parsing phrases for 40 years like the Clintons have. To me, it’s actually refreshing not to have to figure out what “…the meaning of ‘is’ is”.

I can only speak for myself, not other liberals. The problem, as I see it, with Trump’s rhetoric about Saddam Hussein is not that what he is saying is incorrect but rather that it is not helpful for him to be critical of the War in Iraq since it alienates his Republican base. Further, as I have stated previously, he is missing an opportunity to focus on the central issue of the day, in my view, which is the Clinton email scandal and the FBI report which essentially, and unjustly, exonerates her for wrongdoing. Trump should keep his eye on the prize rather than make his audiences disturbed or confused by revealing his opposition to Republican leadership. Now it may be he wants to show his independence from both parties and thinks that is what his followers like about him. There may be some truth to this, but he still runs the risk of antagonizing too many conservative Republicans by his siding with Democratic positions.

 

[TMC]

I can only speak for myself, not other liberals. The problem, as I see it, with Trump’s rhetoric about Saddam Hussein is not that what he is saying is incorrect, but rather that it is not helpful for him to be critical of the War in Iraq since it alienates his Republican base. Further, as I have stated previously, he is missing an opportunity to focus on the central issue of the day, in my view, which is the Clinton email scandal and the FBI report which essentially, and unjustly, exonerates her for wrongdoing. Trump should keep his eye on the prize rather than make his audiences disturbed or confused by revealing his opposition to Republican leadership. Now it may be he wants to show his independence from both parties and thinks that is what his followers like about him. There may be some truth to this, but he still runs the risk of antagonizing too many conservative Republicans by his siding with Democratic positions.

The thing I did not like about his comments on Saddam is that I took his comments to be expressing admiration for Saddam ignoring the rights of his own citizens and killing those he viewed as a threat. He said essentially the same thing about Kim Jong-un.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I can only speak for myself, not other liberals. The problem, as I see it, with Trump’s rhetoric about Saddam Hussein is not that what he is saying is incorrect, but rather that it is not helpful for him to be critical of the War in Iraq since it alienates his Republican base. Further, as I have stated previously, he is missing an opportunity to focus on the central issue of the day, in my view, which is the Clinton email scandal and the FBI report which essentially, and unjustly, exonerates her for wrongdoing. Trump should keep his eye on the prize rather than make his audiences disturbed or confused by revealing his opposition to Republican leadership. Now it may be he wants to show his independence from both parties and thinks that is what his followers like about him. There may be some truth to this, but he still runs the risk of antagonizing too many conservative Republicans by his siding with Democratic positions.

As a tactical issue, I would agree with you, at least tentatively.

I do not personally agree with half of Trump’s position on Iraq (the shouldn’t have intervened part) though I do agree with his “shouldn’t have abandoned it” part. I don’t actually know how many Repubs presently criticize going in. Jeb Bush sure did. So did Rubio. Can’t remember how many more of them did.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The thing I did not like about his comments on Saddam is that I took his comments to be expressing admiration for Saddam ignoring the rights of his own citizens and killing those he viewed as a threat. He said essentially the same thing about Kim Jong-un.

Sure, if a person takes one part of what he says and ignores the rest. All Trump said about Saddam was that he was good at killing terrorists, and added that he was a “bad man” even so. Both things are indisputably true, and the statement does not amount to a blanket endorsement of Saddam Hussein.

But the way his statement about Saddam Hussein as expressed in your post is not what he actually said at all.

And Hillary Clinton invented the lie that Trump “said the same thing” about Kim Jong-un. What he actually said is that Kim “deserved credit” for taking over at such a young age, but that he’s a “maniac” and a nuclear threat.

It’s not wise to believe everything the DNC coins for Hillary to say.

 

[TMC]

Sure, if a person takes one part of what he says and ignores the rest. All Trump said about Saddam was that he was good at killing terrorists, and added that he was a “bad man” even so. Both things are indisputably true, and the statement does not amount to a blanket endorsement of Saddam Hussein.

But the way his statement about Saddam Hussein as expressed in your post is not what he actually said at all.

And Hillary Clinton invented the lie that Trump “said the same thing” about Kim Jong-un. What he actually said is that Kim “deserved credit” for taking over at such a young age, but that he’s a “maniac” and a nuclear threat.

It’s not wise to believe everything the DNC coins for Hillary to say.

Well, as I said, that it was I took him to be suggesting. I have heard his statement, and I hear what he said about Kim, and that remains the impression it made on me. I am concerned that he seems to have affinity for “strong man” authoritarian rulers like Saddam, Kim and Putin. Those are not good models for a US President, in my view.

 

[estesbob]

It is foolish to have two days of news coverage when your opponent is being called careless by the head of the FBI dominated by what you say about Saddam Hussian. THat is Politics 101.

If you do not regret your vote now, you will in November if Trump is the nominee because he will lose to Clinton. I think many voted for Trump to help Clinton get elected in the open primary states!

N ot Trumps fault-he could have sad the sky is blue and the MM would have attacked him viciously saying the sky was gray-anything to change the subject away from Hillary and the rigged Justice system that once more let Clinton off

 

[tomarin]

Trump’s comments are essentially correct - we and the world were better off with secular dictators in charge in the Middle East and North Africa - but anything that fuels the perception that he admires dictators plays into the media’s narrative of him as a wannabe tin-pot dictator and will be given extensive attention.

 

[XndrK]

I feel like whoever is going to win this race, there will be riots in the streets.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Today Trump was tweeting about the Star Of David controversy again. He found a Disney coloring book with a similar star and was complaining that the media didn’t pick on that coloring book.

I’m not sure why he cannot say “Hey I didn’t mean to offend”.

 

[Thorolfr]

Trump’s comments are essentially correct - we and the world were better off with secular dictators in charge in the Middle East and North Africa - but anything that fuels the perception that he admires dictators plays into the media’s narrative of him as a wannabe tin-pot dictator and will be given extensive attention.

It’s also that Trump seems to disdain the rule of law and due process, institutions that hopefully make the US better than Saddam Hussein and other dictators. So when Trump says about Saddam Hussein, "They didn’t read them the rights, " it’s rather disturbing that he seems to think that it’s a good idea not to read criminals their rights. Or what about this comment: “Saddam Hussein throws a little gas, everyone goes crazy. ‘Oh he’s using gas!’”. Does he really think that it’s OK to use poison gas against people which is a war crime? Very disturbing for Trump to say this. It’s also quite disturbing for Trump to express admiration for North Korea’s Kim Jong Un by saying, "he’s the boss. It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle. He wiped out this one, that one.” So he’s in favor of wiping out his opponents?

I don’t think it’s just a media fueled narrative that Trump admires many things about dictators and their methods. I think he really does.

 

[XndrK]

Today Trump was tweeting about the Star Of David controversy again. He found a Disney coloring book with a similar star and was complaining that the media didn’t pick on that coloring book.

I’m not sure why he cannot say “Hey I didn’t mean to offend”.

That’s … pretty funny, actually.

Difference: The six-pointed star for the Frozen coloring book is, within the context, reminiscent of a snowflake. (Because, you know, Frozen.) The other one is devoid of context, and given its origins and its political message, it is way too easy to interpret it as anti-Semitic.